4.7 Review

Recent progress of nondestructive techniques for fruits damage inspection: a review

期刊

CRITICAL REVIEWS IN FOOD SCIENCE AND NUTRITION
卷 62, 期 20, 页码 5476-5494

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2021.1885342

关键词

Fruits; damage; nondestructive techniques; multivariate analysis

资金

  1. National key R&D program of China [2018YFD0101002, 2017YFD0700501]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61705195, 31471417]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fruits are susceptible to damage during their growth, harvest, and storage, which can impact both food safety and economic benefits. To address this issue, there is a need for rapid and nondestructive detection methods for fruit damage. This paper summarizes various nondestructive techniques for detecting fruit damage, providing insights for future research and real-world applications.
In the process of growing, harvesting, and storage, fruits are vulnerable to mechanical damage, microbial infections, and other types of damage, which not only reduce the quality of fruits, increase the risk of fungal infections, in turn greatly affect food safety, but also sharply reduce economic benefits. Hence, it is essential to identify damaged fruits in time. Rapid and nondestructive detection of fruits damage is in great demand. In this paper, the latest research progresses on the detection of fruits damage by nondestructive techniques, including visible/near-infrared spectroscopy, chlorophyll fluorescence techniques, computer vision, multispectral and hyperspectral imaging, structured-illumination reflectance imaging, laser-induced backscattering imaging, optical coherence tomography, nuclear magnetic resonance and imaging, X-ray imaging, electronic nose, thermography, and acoustic methods, are summarized. We briefly introduce the principles of these techniques, summarize their applicability. The challenges and future trends are also proposed to provide beneficial reference for future researches and real-world applications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据